The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Theories of Fairness and Reciprocity: Evidence and Economic Applications
Open accessAbstract
INTRODUCTION Most economic models are based on the self-interest hypothesis that assumes that all people are exclusively motivated by their material self-interest. Many influential economists – including Adam Smith (1759), Gary Becker (1974), Kenneth Arrow (1981), Paul Samuelson (1993), and Amartya Sen (1995) – pointed out that people often do care for the well-being of others and that this may have important economic consequences. Yet, so far, these opinions have not had much of an impact on mainstream economics. In recent years, experimental economists have gathered overwhelming evidence that systematically refutes the self-interest hypothesis. The evidence suggests that many people are strongly motivated by other-regarding preferences, and that concerns for fairness and reciprocity cannot be ignored in social interactions. Moreover, several theoretical papers have been written showing that the observed phenomena can be explained in a rigorous and tractable manner. Some of these models shed new light on problems that have puzzled economists for a long time (e.g., the persistence of noncompetitive wage premia, the incompleteness of contracts, the allocation of property rights, the conditions for successful collective action, and the optimal design of institutions). These theories in turn induced a new wave of experimental research offering additional exciting insights into the nature of preferences and into the relative performance of competing theories of fairness. The purpose of this paper is to review these recent developments, to point out open questions, and to suggest avenues for future research. Furthermore, we will argue that it is not only necessary, but also very promising for mainstream economics to take the presence of other-regarding preferences into account.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988) · Critical Issues in Social Justice · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-2115-4 · Cited by 6,585
Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History
Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., & McCabe, K. (1995) · Games and Economic Behavior · doi:10.1006/game.1995.1027 · Cited by 5,548
Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments
Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2000) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.90.4.980 · Cited by 4,547
Self-citationCollective action and the evolution of social norms.
Ostrom, E. (2000) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.14.3.137 · Cited by 4,195
Are people conditionally cooperative? Evidence from a public goods experiment
Fischbacher, U., Gächter, S., & Fehr, E. (2001) · Economics Letters · doi:10.1016/s0165-1765(01)00394-9 · Cited by 2,780
Self-citationWhen Social Outcomes Aren′t Fair: The Effect of Causal Attributions on Preferences
Blount, S. (1995) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.1995.1068 · Cited by 814
Positive reciprocity and intentions in trust games
McCabe, K. A., Rigdon, M. L., & Smith, V. L. (2003) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/s0167-2681(03)00003-9 · Cited by 659
On expectations and the monetary stakes in ultimatum games
Hoffman, E., McCabe, K. A., & Smith, V. L. (1996) · International Journal of Game Theory · doi:10.1007/bf02425259 · Cited by 356
Cited by
Psychological foundations of incentives
Fehr, E., & Falk, A. (2002) · European Economic Review · doi:10.1016/s0014-2921(01)00208-2 · Cited by 1,240
Self-citationArtificial Intelligence and Its Implications for Income Distribution and Unemployment
Korinek, A., & Stiglitz, J. (2017) · doi:10.3386/w24174 · Cited by 380
Measuring Social Norms and Preferences Using Experimental Games: A Guide for Social Scientists
Camerer, C. F., & Fehr, E. (2002) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.299143 · Cited by 365
Self-citationWhy Don't Trade Preferences Reflect Economic Self-Interest?
Rho, S., & Tomz, M. (2017) · International Organization · doi:10.1017/s0020818316000394 · Cited by 363
Fairness and Incentives in a Multi‐task Principal–Agent Model
Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (2004) · The Scandinavian Journal of Economics · doi:10.1111/j.0347-0520.2004.00372.x · Cited by 253
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M.
- Venue
- Advances in Economics and Econometrics
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2010-01-12
- Pages
- 208-257
- OpenAlex
- W1508186789
- Cited by
- 348
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 128.85
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Theories of Fairness and Reciprocity: Evidence and Economic Applications. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9780511610240.008
- The paper
- Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (2010). Theories of Fairness and Reciprocity: Evidence and Economic Applications. Advances in Economics and Econometrics. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511610240.008
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.